AmericanPapist Comments
I pray God will have mercy on his soul and help his victims find peace. I hope the cult methods will stop with his death. The Legion is suing Regain http://www.regainnetwork.org in order to harass, bankrupt and *** silence ** them.
Watch for official ReGAIN reaction, once the news sinks in.
their website is currently down.
Since MM's been almost irrelevant for years (other than a figurehead), the question is whether the Legion can let go of him and his toxic methodology in order to truly build up the real Church. When they shift from recruiting and fundraising to authentic discernment practices and reliable spiritual direction for the lay faithful, they will be part of Holy Mother Church. At present, that's not possible. Their reaction and treatment of the founder will indicate a lot.
I pray that God will have mercy on his soul.
Regnum Christi has been a blessing in my life and in my wife's, as well as all of our friends who are in it. All the Legionary priests I have met have been dedicated in their service to us and to the Church.
I have no association with the Legion aside from knowing a couple priests and having many friends who are active in RC. The priests seem solid in every way and all of my friends have grown spiritually through RC. I imagine there have been abuses and mistakes, as one would expect with anything, but I find the animus directed at the Legion to be irrational -- similar to that directed toward Opus Dei.
See regnumchristi.org for Fr. Alvaro's letter on the passing of our founder.
I can't believe the presumption of the LC's stating that Maciel has gone to "his celestial home".
Yeah, riiiiiiiiight. Molest young boys for forty years and go zinging straight into the arms of the Most Pure Christ.
It's putrid and perverse. And until the organization renounces Maciel, they are too.
The Legion of Christ is not an Order. They are a Religious Congregation. "Orders" follow a rule. "Congregations" have constitutions. I have yet to see the secular or much of the religious media (or blogs) getting this correct.
Pazd., your usage of those terms is idiosyncractic. The canonical distinctions are otherwise. See 1983 CIC. Best, edp.
Barb N:
Innocent until proven guilty - does that not count for Fr Maciel? Also, for all we know, he could have made a good confession before dying and indeed have gone straight to heaven. Who are we to judge? I am neither Regnum Christi nor Legionary (in fact, I don't know them except from literature), but I really don't think it is our place to judge where the deceased Fr Maciel's soul is right now.
I do not think we should judge where his soul is either, which means we don't know if he went straight to heaven either. (A good confession at the end of ones life does not in itself exclude purgatory as a destination).
In any event, I know a Legionary seminarian who has been utterly convinced for a long time that Fr. Maciel was a living saint and, like many saints, was being slandered and persecuted by many within and without the Church. Somehow I get the impression that this is what the Legion taught its pupils.
I agree Victor, which is why I personally find it troubling that the Legion, on their official webpage, has seen fit to canonize Fr. Maciel, by noting that he has gone to heaven. This automatic canonization of the dead - a very widespread practice, so I'm not just critizing the Legion - weakens the resolve of the faithful to prayer for our beloved dead, as we are enjoined to do by the Church.
For Fr. Niceguy to do it at grandma's funeral is worrisome, but somewhat understandable. For the Legion, which prides itself on its orthodoxy, to do this, and thus minimize the need to pray for his, and all souls, is very troublesome.
Aside from the theological problems with "instant canonization," in the case of a person who has been the cause of scandal, it's just Bad Taste.
One thing people are forgetting is that the Legionaries are a Mexican order, and that some things just don't translate well. People who see a cult of the personality just don't know how sentimental Mexicans are in their expressions. I don't think that there is any intention to "cannonize", and what you are seeing is simply a cross-cultural difficulty in translation of common Mexican expression at the death of a loved one.
raquel, who says certain common expressions in spanish can't be just as misleading for spanish-speakers as some common expressions in english can be misleading for english-speakers? i've read the notice in several languages, and i have no doubt but that it falls under the "instant canonization" category.
btw an email notice from the LC's asked for prayers for MM's soul, which request is of course entirely in line with sound catholic practice.
but the web-posting is objectionable, plain and simple.
There seems to be quite a lot about the Legion of Christ that "gets lost in translation".
Good riddance.
"Good riddance."
Always nice to hear from a Catholic gentleman.
Fr. Marcial Maciel,LC in my opinion lived a life of holiness and sacrifice. Although I am not a Legionary, I have personally met him quite a few times. I do not believe in the acusations against him.
Michael, I am happy for you that you were not one of Maciel's victims.
I'm not Mexican, but I'm Hispanic and I agree with most of the people here: it is not an issue of translation. There are a lot of strange things relating to the Legion.
If anyone is interested to know what I'm talking about, read the Constitution of the Legionaries of Christ here. It's supposed to be "secret" and we have had access to it through ex-legionaries. I've read the original one in Spanish and I can personally attest that this translation is accurate.
I have a lot of friends that are involved with RC and I'm personally involved with a Legionaries' school. I love all these people and I'm good friends with them, but there is a poor understanding among them about the Church being more than just the Legion and to me that is just sad and unfortunate.
Honestly... it's hard to know what to think of LC with all the talk the past few years. I don't know anymore if supporting them is a good thing or a bad thing.
John, trust your instincts.
I went to a Regnum Christi elementary school and at one point considered attending their discernment school for girls in Rhode Island. I have to say that I have never had any reason to doubt or suspect anyone or anything related to the Legion or Regnum Christi. Their aim, truely, is to grow closer to Christ and the Church and to evangelize.
May God bless Fr. Maciel!
Why couldn't he be in heaven? If a man dies in the state of grace he goes to heaven does he not? And if a man was to make his final confession and then receive the last rites prior to death, would not the witnesses of the same be morally certain of his "celestial welcome"?
How, in the era of the Divine Mercy, in a faith that preaches that ALL sins can be forgiven, can so-called Catholic critics take it upon themselves to know for certain the state of his soul to the degree that they can judge him damned?
It's absolutely clear Catholic moral theology that a man who dies in the state of grace goes to heaven. Since none of the on-line critics know anything about the details surrounding his death, I find it hard to accept their certainty that he hadn't received the sacrament of reconcilliation, and Viaticum prior to death.
To just assume a man is guilty of some crime decades ago and to further assume him to be unrepentant is to claim to know the state of his soul, which last I checked, was not something orthodox Catholics believed themselves capable of knowing with certainty when it comes to people living far away.
John,
It's pretty clear from the Vatican statement that we are meant to understand that Maciel is guilty. Look at what just about every canon lawyer has to say about it. I have a hard time believing that Pope Benedict would do this to him if the accusations weren't true.
Unfortunately, the LC doesn't seem to accept Maciel's guilt. They still imply that the victims are lying. If Maciel had repented, would this still be the party line?
As a Catholic, I pray that he repented of his horrible sins before he died. Unfortunately, his followers seem incapable of even considering that he was guilty and therefore haven't been praying for his soul for the past several years. Wouldn't that be tragic if he perishes because there was no one to pray for him? I do know that at least one of his victims prays for him, at least. He might very well be beyond our prayers now.
The news reports that Fr. Maciel will be buried in his hometown in Mexico. According to the LC constitutions: "n196. Since a Legionary is a soldier of Christ's Kingdom and his life is consecrated to building it, his body should be buried in the place where he dies, according to the genuine tradition of the Church." Even in death Fr. Maciel is above the law.
John: Nobody here has said that Maciel is in hell, or expressed a hope that he is. Even saying "good riddance," while hostile, does not express the hope that he is damned. I have said the same thing about a few people I've known. I would have said the same thing whether they had been departing for eternity or for Cleveland. In neither case would I have hoped that they would end up in hell.
What is objectionable is that the LC is smugly asserting that Maciel has gone straight to heaven, not even mentioning the high probability (which is the case for virtually everyone, we are encouraged to believe) that he is in purgatory.
The LC's fulsome veneration of Maciel during his life smacked of cultism, encouraged by the cult leader. Their carrying over of this veneration after his death is a form of self-aggrandizement on the part of the LC's members, especially its leaders. They appear to be so fixedly attached to this unbalanced piety that they aren't even capable of spotting when it spills over into public expressions that are overtly heterodox.
When the man in question was the cause of suffering and scandal, all the more reason for revulsion when the organization's narcissistic, pietific exclamations about his sanctity continue.
Did he die in the state of grace? I hope so. I will say some prayers for him. Was he a narcissist, who founded a cult to feed his ego? I think so. Was he an abuser, whose followers are really his victims of one kind or another, who have been systematically formed into well-defended neurotics? It looks that way to me.
It's also not "perfectly clear" in Catholic moral theology that someone who dies in a state of grace goes to heaven - directly. Certainly someone who dies in a state of grace goes to heaven, yet many, if not most, who die in a state of grace go to purgatory first, hence we pray for the beloved dead.
Those who do not die in a state of grace go to hell. They cannot benefit from prayer. Those who die in a state of grace (would that it be all of us!) end up in heaven, but some after entering the Church suffering, for whom we are enjoined to offer prayers. I pray for Fr. Maciel, that he truly died in a state of grace and that, if not in heaven, at least he be in a state where my prayers have effect. Requiem aeternam, dona ei, Domine.
What Fr. Joe and Tim said. Naturally.
The LC is (for the most part) a group of "true believers" like any cult. They have made tremendous personal sacrifices in order to be part of this "elite" group. All they have, do, live, believe, think, breathe, has come to them from God via Maciel. It is a core belief that he was a great saint. Period.
How interesting is it that those who claim to be on the side of angels are the quickest to rush to judgment about his soul - just as they're quick to accept the 'infallibility' of people who level accusations against someone.
Because, as we all know, people never lie. about sex. ever. And there's never ever been cases of accusers making things up about people.
But if a man should spend his life doing countless acts of humility, service, kindness and gentleness...as witnessed by thousands of people...ah, that counts for nothing. He's accused therefore he did NOTHING good.
If a man should spend his life helping the Church in innumerable ways, helping diocesan bishops, other orders, other lay groups with advice, with material and financial support....it's to be completely discounted and ignored because, of course, accusations are never wrong and they "mean" that the accused could not possibly have done ANYTHING good or praiseworthy, ever.
And whereas every OTHER Catholic can repeat of his sins, do penance, and live in the state of grace, the on-line critics know for SURE that Fr Maciel didn't. Just because. They're infallible judges of the soul. And this is "catholic" theology?
I find it interesting that many of these critics have never met the man, read much if anything of his works, know much, if anything of what he's done for the Church...and so, on the basis of the accusations (taken as infallible) they sit in judgment about what he thought of himself, what "the LC smugly" thinks about him, etc.
It's sort of hard to claim one is on the side of angels when one is so eager to condemn a man as definately a sinner. Eager to say "for sure" it's impossible or unseemly to suggest he went to heaven. After all, he was accused. And accusers never lie, are never wrong. Especially if leveled against a conservative leader of a religious order.
If you don't know anything about someone other than that some people accuse him of heinous crimes.... that's not a whole lot to go on when it comes to being able to make a good guess as to his eternal reward.
But I know. He was "conservative" which means of course he was evil, right? He obeyed the Pope and founded a congregation that obeys the Pope...another damning proof of evil. Then this group has the audacity to be successful in recruitment and fundraising! I mean, surely as Catholics we've never seen any other group seek to grow or find donors to keep the lights on, right?
Then the worst crime...he was given special treatment as founder. I mean what's more ridiculous than that huh? I mean, surely no other order has treated their founder specially. I'm sure the Benedictines, Franciscans, Dominicans, Salesians, Claritians...none have done anything special with their founder's bodies...like, oh, build churches over them? No, the audacity of Fr Maciel being buried in his home town, when Glen, if he died still a Legionary would have been treated differently, yep
The Lord is kind and merciful, but sometimes mankind falls short. Some of us choose to fall short. Is it a lack of charity on my part? Perhaps. I truly wish him no hell, but I wish him no heaven, either.
He and his disgraced, child molesting, fallen-priest ilk have driven driven more souls away from the Church than anything in my lifetime. From my point of view, they are the most dangerous enemies of the Church and the most dangerous enemies of Christ.
Note: when I say "ilk", I mean perpatrator clergymen, not members of Legion of Christ, whom I know nothing about.
"How interesting is it that those who claim to be on the side of angels are the quickest to rush to judgment about his soul."
Who claimed to be on the side of angels? You're implying false accusations. The only people rushing to judgment on Maciel's soul, is the LC; the rest of us are cautioning that "he probably isn't. If he's in purgatory, he desperately needs your prayers. If he's in hell, it's too late; you should have prayed that he repent when he was still alive.
"- just as they're quick to accept the 'infallibility' of people who level accusations against someone."
I did accept the judgment of the Vatican, who accepted the accusations of Maciel's abuse victims. Why can't you?
"Because, as we all know, people never lie. about sex. ever. And there's never ever been cases of accusers making things up about people."
So you accept that Maciel might have lied about molesting young boys in his minor seminary? When they came forward, they had nothing to gain, and everything to lose. False accusations are very rare.
"But if a man should spend his life doing countless acts of humility, service, kindness and gentleness...as witnessed by thousands of people...ah, that counts for nothing."
If someone did that, God would have mercy on him. Maciel sought special treatment, didn't live by the rules of his congregation, and molested young boys in his care.
"He's accused therefore he did NOTHING good."
This is just silly.
"If a man should spend his life helping the Church in innumerable ways, helping diocesan bishops, other orders, other lay groups with advice, with material and financial support....it's to be completely discounted and ignored because, of course, accusations are never wrong and they "mean" that the accused could not possibly have done ANYTHING good or praiseworthy, ever."
Who did he help? He badmouthed the Jesuits his whole life because they, like his uncle San Rafael, kicked him out of the seminary. The K of C and Tom Monaghan financed his ventures. The LC/RC is notorious for not being able to get along with other groups, and they never accept blame; it's always jealousy or lack of faithfulness to the Pope etc.
"And whereas every OTHER Catholic can repeat of his sins, do penance, and live in the state of grace, the on-line critics know for SURE that Fr Maciel didn't. Just because. They're infallible judges of the soul. And this is "catholic" theology?"
Again, nope. We're putting the brakes on the idea that he's now in heaven already. You know, that's the saddest part. He had tens of thousands of followers, but since you have all been convinced that he was a living saint, you couldn't pray that he repent of his great sins, and now it might be too late. I just don't know of course, but given his behavior, it's a real possibility that he's in hell.
"I find it interesting that many of these critics have never met the man, read much if anything of his works,
John: I invite you to reread the posts that you are responding to. I don't believe that anybody made the assertions you are complaining about, such as: Maciel is in hell; Maciel never repented; the Vatican's judgment is infallible; the LC is evil because it's "conservative," etc.
My own negative impressions of the LC are NOT based on the accusations made again Maciel. I believed all that I said about the LC years before I heard about the accusations. Reading the Constitutions makes my skin crawl.
Far from believing "the Vatican" to be infallible, my confidence in "the Vatican" is weakened, not reinforced, when I think that anyone would be permitted to run an organization in the Church according to such rules, which are, on their face, a blueprint for dysfunction, manipulation, and neurosis. I would hope that if anyone ever came to me and said, "Here's my plan..." and showed me that document, I would exert every effort to make sure he never got anywhere near a seminary or religious house again, let alone be permitted to found anything.
Thank God for the internet, which has made it so easy to disseminate such documents, previously kept under tight control. Personally, I think nothing could be a more effective means of shutting down the LC than putting that Constitution into the hands of young Catholic men and their parents.
I invite you to notice that the previous posters did not object ONLY to the special treatment of Maciel's body, but his special treatment while alive. I don't know about the other founders, but the Franciscans' treatment of Francis (while he was alive) was lousy. And the Carmelites tried to murder John of the Cross. A founder doesn't HAVE to be treated rotten in order to be a saint--I'm just saying.
When people read your response to their posts, and are able, truthfully, to say--"but I never said THAT"--you aren't really making any case.
Katerina, after reading your posted constitution, all I can say is that there is nothing bad in it. The prohibitions against cliques and back-bitting make solid sense in an organization where people live in community. And as far as obedience goes, well, it sounds pretty commonplace to me. I've got 3 aunts who are nuns, 3 cousins who are priests, and how the constitution explains obedience seems to be the same as the explanations I got when I spent 3 years in a residential school run by nuns, and confirmed by my religious relatives. My father spent his youth in a junior noviciate, some 70+ years ago, and the rules then are almost identical to the rules you posted. They got out for a few days at Christmas. That was it.
One of my aunts described how she had to prostrate herself before mother superior at the noviciate just to ask for a safety pin.
It might be a useful exercise if you were to compare these rules to the rules of the great monastic orders, and other religious orders. Then you would see that there is nothing unusual in the Legion of Christ's rules. I think that most people who grew up after Vatican II are totally out of touch with what religious culture is, and react with shock and protest at the abrogation of individual liberty that was part of the traditional religious life.
My point is...those who knew Fr Maciel during his life and especially in these last years had founded reasons to believe he was living in the state of grace. Those who only knew of him via the accusations are doing ALOT of assuming about him.
And so, if you knew someone to live an exemplary life, saw him go to confession, saw him receive the viaticum and then saw him die, it wouldn't be a stretch to consider him heaven-bound as opposed to beginning a 1 million year purgatory.
As for the Vatican... it was NOT a judgment of guilt. He wasn't declared guilty and then defrocked. Nor was he exonerated (because there had been no trial). He could STILL say Mass, albeit not in public. It was one of those diplomatic "both sides got less than what they wanted" solutions and is not unprecedented in the life and history of the Church.
Those who have alot invested in him being guilty seem to have a lot less evidence for the same than those of us who believe him innocent.
So ALL online folk lumping him together with true, proven monstrous pedophiles are unjustly jumping the gun and ASSUMING guilt for other reasons than "the facts as determined in a court of law"; like their own personal biases and presuppositions about what a religious congregation ought to be like, or how they ought to recruit, or raise funds, or how they ought to treat their founders....
Begruding him a burial in his home town as opposed to Houston? That's just petty.
Claiming that the rules approved by the Church in 1983 are impossible to lead to holiness or claiming that they inevitably lead to abuse is more a question (IMHO) of projection than evidentiary based "catholic" reasoning. Especially when comparing them with the constitutions and rules of other groups.
Who among us here could stand up against a largely anonymous peanut gallery accusing any of us of the worst crimes if the bar of credibility wasn't proof but the "seriousness of the charge" and its repetion on every medium of communication? If we could not get our friends and witnesses to come to our defense and had to see our name blackened everywhere - who here could long stand?
The measure with which we measure will be used against us my friends. Those who find themselves assuming the worst about others and being outraged should mercy be shown to others, need to ask why they are so invested in this man being guilty when they DON'T KNOW.
Raquel:
"One of my aunts described how she had to prostrate herself before mother superior at the noviciate just to ask for a safety pin."
Which proves only one thing--the insanity of the 'Sixties was preceded by the insanity of the 'Fifties, 'Forties, 'Thirties....
John:
Your comments are simply not responses to the preceding posts. You habitually use the "straw man" argument--everyone on this board is a liberal, everyone is judging Maciel's SOUL, everyone is saying he is in hell, everyone is saying negative things about the LC ONLY because of the accusations against Maciel. In fact, no one has posted anything of the kind here.
As far as the LC Constitution is concerned, it speaks for itself. Here's an example: It is a blueprint for entrenched, irreformable abuse of authority. It prescribes and encourages triangulation, snitching, and espionage, and specifically prohibits direct, honest, man-to-man communication. The power wielded by superiors in the LC would corrupt anyone except Christ Himself. I would say that the Constitution is evidence that those who composed it suffered from the delusion that they WERE saints or even gods, and the Constitution is the blueprint for a cult whose primary purpose is to defend that delusion.
I am confident that someday there will be a consensus that the approval of this Constitution will be seen as a blot on the Vatican's reputation. Fortunately, already, one of the bizarre vows taken in the LC has been abrogated.
Fr Joe,
This is what happens to anyone who disagrees with them.
John and Raquel,
I think there's something wrong with the Legion, after reading the norms and the first and second general chapters, and Envoy II. It's creepy. You have the right to disagree and stay in RC, but I think these documents should be available to anyone who is considering joining LC, RC, YTM (now MY), Challenge, ConQuest, Leadership Training Program, Kids 4 Jesus, Sportsleader, Pilgrim Queen of the Family, Familia, Christian Life, or any other RC group, so they can decide for themselves. You're ridiculing those of us who have made this informed decision, and the Legion is suing those who have provided this resource.
Lots of RC members tell us in comboxes that RC is wonderful and all the priests are holy and it's made you all really good people (see Devin Rose and Mike Petrik's posts at the beginning) but I sure don't see it here, and I certainly don't see it at my parish.
Dear Fr.Joe, if the above posters are not judging the state of Fr Maciel's soul, then what possible motive would you and they have in cautioning or having issues with the LC saying he's gone to his celestial reward?
To take issue with the formal statement of a grieving congregation on the departure of their founder is to "judge" the state of his soul as being not in the state of grace. There's no other way to read these critiques of a communique.
As for them being smug...they ARE asking for prayers for his soul - and indeed their own constitutions mandate a whole series of prayers for the repose of his soul.... nothing could be further from the truth to claim that the LC in general or Fr Maciel in particular thought themselves beyond the need for mercy.
As for YOUR claims that the LC constitutions were the result of twisted minds, giving far too much power to mere men, I say...you have NO idea what the heck you're talking about. The vow of obedience and the vows of charity were designed and lived precisely to avoid backbiting, gossip, and unmanly conduct. If you had an issue with a brother, you were to go to him directly. If the issue was with a superior, you were to go to HIS superior (and not fellow subjects).
And most LCs get this. Only those who feel the need to gossip consider their unmanly conduct to be "snitched" upon should someone refuse to join in their fun. Nothing in those constitutions forbids members from reporting illegal or illicit actions of superiors up the chain of command, past the Superior General to the Cardinal Prefect or the Pope. But naturally those who are not manly, not honest, not motivated by the truth would prefer to just gossip to their fellows, undermining morale and the hierarchy.
Their obedience was also not considered "blind" but motivated (i.e. based on reasons).
The LC charism is not for most people, but it's not a recipe for malicious evil either. Claiming it is and proving it is are two very different things.
"Dear Fr.Joe, if the above posters are not judging the state of Fr Maciel's soul, then what possible motive would you and they have in cautioning or having issues with the LC saying he's gone to his celestial reward?"
1) Once again, you distort what others have said. The LC statement said that he went to Heaven. Heaven is a definite place, while "celestial reward" is not. I invite you to abandon this habit of distorting what others say.
2) That statement is objectionable in the case of the death of ANY person. Therefore, it is objectionable in this case. Notice: It's objectionable on THEOLOGICAL grounds, not on the grounds that "Maciel is in hell."
3) In the case of Maciel, there is the matter of simple good taste. It is theologically objectionable to declare that ANY person is "in Heaven" immediately after death; more so in the case of a person credibly accused of crimes.
4) The LC's declaration that Maciel is in Heaven reveals more about the LC than about anything else: A kind of corporate narcissism, rigid clinging to self-aggrandizing myth. Whoever composed the declaration that Maciel is in Heaven is so attached to this myth that he was insensible even to the fact that he was violating a basic norm regarding speech about the dead. It is not slandering the deceased to say that he might be in Purgatory.
The Legionaries are both asking for prayers for him and asserting that they believe he's going to his heavenly reward. I don't see the necessary contradiction here precisely because no one but God knows.
The Spanish version of the communique reads "El Padre Álvaro Corcuera...comunican la partida de su querido Padre Fundador, el Padre
MARCIAL MACIEL DEGOLLADO, L.C.
a la Patria celestial"
Which would be more appropriately translated as "celestial homeland" and not Heaven. Fine. whatever. But Catholic theology on the reality of purgatory does not claim that all souls must first be purged.
We don't know - we can't know whether he needs 1 second or a million years of purgation. Or none at all.
But we DO know that he had plenty of time for penance. That he did suffer tremendously for decades (various physical illnesses, a brain tumor in the 1980s, etc.) and that he lived to see his reputation completely ruined. If that's not a purgatory on earth what more could be devised?
But to quibble, to lend more credence to accusers and their secret testimony than the hundreds of thousands and their open testimony of his holiness.... that's not "catholic".
If he's in purgatory then he's heaven bound. Saved. "Going home to Jesus". Of course his followers are going to assume this. What's so sinister or cultish about that? Are we all to slavishly follow the judgments of our critics and disbelieve the experince of our own eyes?
For some reason you can't stand the idea that his followrs be confident in his innocence and therefore in his going to his heavenly homeland because you are invested in his guilt WITHOUT PROOF.
Apparently it's guilty until proven innocent when the charge is pedophilia. That's not Catholic and it's not justice either. All those accusers had fellow seminarians who were there and saw no abuse. They all had superiors and subjects, peers who know the score but where never put under oath in a trial... and there are literally thousands of people whom Fr Maciel personally helped, cared for, brought support and healing to... and I have it on good authority that a bad tree does not produce good fruit.
But you dislike him and think you understand his rule, so that's enough apparently to assume he's either not already in Heaven, or that it's unseemly to think that because again "the seriousness of the charge" outweighs any evidence of innocence.
John, I just hope, for the sake of Fr. Maciel, that you change your mind and offer some prayers for the repose of his soul.
I invite you to read the descriptions of abuse written by victims. Of course there are many who never saw any abuse. Abusers do not, as a rule, abuse their victims in the refectory in front of dozens of witnesses.
I know a famous Jesuit who, over the past forty years or so, gave thousands of people, including me, and including Mother Theresa and her Missionaries of Charity all over the world, the impression of great holiness, kindness, and orthodoxy. He is now facing multiple federal charges of abuse, and it turns out (now that they have been forced to open their files) the Jesuits are in possession of written complaints going back to 1969.
We now know that covering up abuse in normal behavior even when there is no penalty for doing so. In the LC, in which whistleblowing is a punishable offense, and the sharing of concerns, problems, and observations among subjects forbidden, and all information is to flow from subjects to superiors, and never anywhere else, all the more reason to believe that the normal tendency to maintain secrecy out of fear and shame was being reinforced by the rigid code of secrecy.
One of the many cases of abuse in the LC involved a 19-year-old man who was instructed repeatedly by his spiritual director/superior to go to his room, undress, and kneel at his prie-dieu, and await the arrival of the spiritual director. At which point, repeatedly, he was raped by the spiritual director.
What kind of brainwashing would be necessary to override a Catholic seminarian's moral convictions, and his horror at such treatment? I don't know what kind of brainwashing, nay, terror, it would take--but whatever it would take, he obviously had been subjected to it.
You are right to quote the Lord: By their fruits you shall know them. He spoke also of whited sepulchres, which appear to men to be spotless, but inside are full of rot and corruption.
John,
"As for YOUR claims that the LC constitutions were the result of twisted minds, giving far too much power to mere men, I say...you have NO idea what the heck you're talking about. The vow of obedience and the vows of charity were designed and lived precisely to avoid backbiting, gossip, and unmanly conduct. If you had an issue with a brother, you were to go to him directly. If the issue was with a superior, you were to go to HIS superior (and not fellow subjects)."
You do know that our Pope has suppressed the Legion's private vows, right? Is the Pope an idiot as well?
I am Mexican and I find the statement of "having departed for the heavenly home" ("partió a la patria celestial") not as saying that he went straight to Heaven, but really similar to the "è tornato alla casa del Padre" that we read after JPII's death.
Shall we understand, then, that the Vatican "canonized" John Paul II?
I think the answer is no.
Daniel Anselmo: I have not been referring to any statement in Spanish or Italian. I have been referring to a statement in English on the LC website, which said "heaven."
Of course I've prayed for the repose of his soul - as are the LCs and Regnum Christi members doing these days. Precisely because we DON'T KNOW whether he's in heaven or purgatory, we pray.
But we who knew the man personally as opposed only by "reputation" just don't believe him to be the moral monster the accusers make him out to be. And we don't have experiences of this 'secrecy' and crushing of dissent or "questioning" that others claim to have had with the congregation.
The Pope can change whatever he wants in various religious congregations' rules without this meaning "therefore" that those rules were intrinsically evil. If he in fact asked them to change their vows, I'm sure they obeyed him. It wouldn't have been the first time a Pope approved some constitution or rule only to have another Pope modify or change something.
As for English vs. Spanish...the Legion was founded in Mexico and most of its people are still Spanish speakers. Getting in high dungeon over "heaven" as opposed to "celestial homeland" is just petty.
"And we don't have experiences of this 'secrecy' and crushing of dissent or "questioning" that others claim to have had with the congregation."
John, are you saying that I'm lying, and my friends are, too? I've had nasty experiences with the RC, and so have people I find trustworthy. I haven't disputed your account; why do you see fit to doubt mine? Good priests find themselves the target of false innuendo, and have been disciplined, after they come out against the Legion (Fr Joe, listen!). Do you think you're impressing anyone with your holiness? Do you think anyone here wants to be a good Catholic like you, after the way you've responded here? Your attacks are exactly what I've been experiencing in my parish after urging parents to "research the LC/RC in order to make an informed decision about whether to get involved". Just remember, if you think you need to practice deception for the sake of the kingdom, it's not the right Kingdom.
Raquel,
I would say that no other religious order asks their novices to "renounce [their] will and judgment". How does one renounce one's judgment? One thing is to submit one's will to God and/or judgment and another to renounce it to the "General Director". Where do we read in either Sacred Scripture or Sacred Tradition that God wants us to renounce our will??? What does that say about free will?
John: The Pope didn't ask the LC to change the vow. He abrogated the vow.
I, for one, have not been impressed by your posts. You persist in distorting what others have said. Most of your arguments are formally invalid. And you indulge in nasty, personal invective.
You have, I'm quite sure, done nothing to improve the LC's "image"--which, as far as I'm concerned, is just fine.
I am NOT calling you a liar Jeanette! If you re-read IN CONTEXT what I wrote, it was in reference to MY EXPERIENCE of Fr Maciel in opposition to your experience.
I'm not claiming the Legion or RC is perfect or all members are holy and never screw up. I'm not claiming they have some monopoly on virtue either.
If personal experience is the gold standard for determining what is true or what is more likely to be true, then there are far more people with far more personal experience of the LC, RC, and Fr Maciel who consider them to be good, than those who consider them to be bad.
It's not true that a few bad apples necessarily make ALL bad. Or that misuse makes some rule bad. Or all those works the LC/RC does are bad or fake, or twisted, or not leading people to God because some can find fault here or there with individuals.
You want "false innuendo"? Half the on-line accusations against the Legion in general and Fr Maciel in particular are based on "innuendo" and assumptions about his motives, his interior state of soul, his thoughts....things critics could not POSSIBLY know. And yet they assure us of his evilness on the bases of these innuendos.
Fr Joe is hanging an entire theological claim about the LC's supposed beliefs on a poor translation from the Spanish (which is their official language). That's what I call 'false innuendo'!
Fr Joe further asserts that some kid was raped (thus assuming the story to be true) and then goes off on another assumption about brainwashing and terrorism as a given because he first accepts an unproven and likely unprovable story.
At the most he could assume one novice master to have been bad, not make a jump to "knowing" that the LC seminary formation system is all about mind control (as though that were possible).
But some people need to extrapolate some grand scheme and evil plot on the basis of their few negative experiences...all while accusing the Legion of 'false innuendo' or injustice. And this is unjust.
Why can't we just accept that the Legion and RC are like all OTHER groups in the Church and so will have some good and some bad members?
For some reason, people assume the LC thinks none of their members are frail human beings needing grace to persevere. This is completely untrue. Or they think RC members - lay people - automatically can speak for the Movement from the first moment of joining.
To glom on to individual examples who are 'imperfect' and then declare for sure that the whole congregation is nothing more than "bad men" or weak willed zombies terrorized into submission on the basis of a completely fantastic story... that's hardly "catholic", HARDLY just, and hardly something one would expect of folks sincerely seeking the truth.
Fr Joe, I challenge you to quote just one of my comments from above that involved personal invective.
Your first post made an assumption about what the Legion meant by Fr Maciel going to heaven. Rather than just do some homework you assumed the worst and ran with it.
Jeanette then claimed that because his followers believed him innocent we "therefore haven't been praying for his soul for the past several years." - That's an assertion based on an assumption.
Then Jeanette she also asserted that the Vatican statement proves he was guilty, when that's not the case. No trial = no proven guilt. American Papist and the Canon Law blog link shows that what happened was NOT a clear "Vatican thinks he's guilty" charge. To believe it was is to again jump to conclusions.
I've not gone ad hominem with anyone. I have argued against their assertions but that's a different matter. Calling someone's argument petty is not "personal invective".
"there are far more people with far more personal experience of the LC, RC, and Fr Maciel who consider them to be good, than those who consider them to be bad."
I beg to differ.
Katerina, you said: "I would say that no other religious order asks their novices to "renounce [their] will and judgment". Yet, this is what St Benedict says on obediance:
"They, therefore, seize upon the narrow way whereof the Lord saith: "Narrow is the way which leadeth to life" (Mt 7:14), so that, not living according to their own desires and pleasures but walking according to the judgment and will of another, they live in monasteries, and desire an Abbot to be over them. Such as these truly live up to the maxim of the Lord in which He saith: "I came not to do My own will, but the will of Him that sent Me" (Jn 6:38).
"This obedience, however, will be acceptable to God and agreeable to men then only, if what is commanded is done without hesitation, delay, lukewarmness, grumbling or complaint, because the obedience which is rendered to Superiors is rendered to God."
Check it out at:
http://www.kansasmonks.org/
RuleO...nedict.html#ch5
Wait... a 19-yr-old at LC was raped? For real?
Katerina, here is the last sentence of Benedict's rule: " For if the disciple obeyeth with an ill will, and murmureth, not only with lips but also in his heart, even though he fulfil the command, yet it will not be acceptable to God, who regardeth the heart of the murmurer. And for such an action he acquireth no reward; rather he incurreth the penalty of murmurers, unless he maketh satisfactory amendment."
John Calla,
The two most recent cases are of a then-three-year-old at a LC school in Mexico City (Colegio de Oxford) being orally assaulted by a teacher at the school-not a priest this time; and now there are accusations against a Fr Rodriguez at a Mano Amiga school last fall. I think there are five accusers but my Spanish is very rusty and I rely on others' informal translations. Milenio has covered the stories down there.
There are many accusations against several different LC priests; most of Maciel's accusers were much younger than 19, I think. Maybe Fr Joe is referring to Fr. Izquierdo who was at Center Harbor in the 1990's?
John: When you accuse people of saying things they never said--and you have repeatedly accused other posters of asserting that Maciel is in hell--I call that personal invective.
"make a jump to "knowing" that the LC seminary formation system is all about mind control (as though that were possible)."
It isn't a jump. It is real. It's called (for lack of a better term) a manipulative "cult".
Funny how easily accessible Benedict's Rule is while the Legion has rules specifically forbidding their dissemination to "outsiders".
Hello friends,
I have just compiled a history of the charges against Fr. Maciel and his defenses for those who want to read a chronological account of the accusations made against him, the investigations that were done, his defenses, and so on.
I do not know of any other single place on the internet where you can find all the information in one place, which is why I compiled the important information into one, ordered account.
I hope it will be beneficial to you.
The problem with that, Devin, is that you have been duped by the Legion so it is definitely a biased account, full of the Legion spin as usual. Because of this you are not able to be completely objective. I am sure that you mean well but be very careful which kingdom you are defending.
The following is from another post that I think applies to this one as well:
"We are well aware of the difficulty in discerning whether or not this movement is from God. Time will deifinitely tell. We have been given a discernment that you have not yet been given. We were members in good standing and experienced the evil that is at the root. We know for certain that it is there. Remember, we are dealing with a diabolical deception. Satan is far more intelligent than we are and knows very well how to deceive the elect. But in his arrogance he always shows his tail. That is what we have seen. You are a victim of the deceptive propaganda that is being spun by the Legion. Where did you get your information for your last post? Let me guess: Zenit News or better yet, The Regnum Christi website? The way that you responded to reading it is exactly the way your emotions were intentionally manipulated to respond. Remember Satan can appear as an angel of the light. How else would he reach orthodox Catholics? They would not be deceived by the same tricks that those with the liberal bent would be deceived.
Persecution of the Church has taken many forms. 'In former times Christians were incited to renounce Christ; now they are taught to deny Christ. Then they were forced, now they are taught; then violence was used, now it is deception; then one heard the shouts of the enemy; now, he prowls around, gentle and insinuating, it is difficult to recognize him. Everyone knows how he tried to force Christians to deny Christ: he tried to attract them to himself so that they would renounce him; but they confessed Christ and were crowned by him. Now they are taught to deny Christ by trickery, because he doesn't want them to realise that he is drawing them away from Christ' (St. Augustine, Commentaries on the Psalms, 39:1).
He draws us away from Christ by the way we treat others.
Christ would never treat people the way that MM/LC does in secret.He would never value them for their ability to bring in money or new members. He would never lie or deceive to evangelize. He would never believe that the end justifies the means. He would never psychologically abuse or intentionally manipulate our emotions to secure our obedience or our silence when we have 'caught on.' He wants us to respond out of FREEDOM and LOVE.
'False messiahs and false prophets will appear, performing signs and wonders so great as to mislead even the chosen if that were possible' (Matt 24:24)."
Devin,
The 2004 book, "Vows of Silence" by Jason Berry and the late Gerald Renner cover the accusations against Marcial Maciel in the second half. The conclusions are a little (okay, a lot) left-wing for me, but their facts are solid. I'm watching for the documentary to be released.
You missed the section where (Bishop) Saint Rafael, his uncle, kicked him out of the seminary; he was kicked out of at least one other, and refused admittance to several others. Any thoughts on why a member of a wealthy, influential Mexican family (two or three other uncles were also bishops) would have so much trouble with seminaries? The LC's unofficial "they were jealous" line isn't plausible.
Jeannette: I understand that Jason Berry and Gerald Renner wrote the Hartford Courant article, which I referenced and used frequently in my timeline and analysis.
I believe that the Courant article that they wrote is biased against the Legion and Fr. Maciel, as well as to a degree the Catholic Church. It even has some Dan Brown-esque Opus Dei attacks about the use of the cilicio.
I have read "Christ Is My Life" where Fr. Maciel is asked about his years in the seminaries and his difficulties and answers those questions. I didn't include them in the timeline I created because I judged those events as not vital to the horrible accusations and defenses against them.
For my part, I could understand why bishops or rectors would not look kindly upon a young seminarian, perhaps 19 years old, talking about founding a new congregation.
CCL: My goal with the timeline and analysis was not to be "objective", per se, but to lay things out in an ordered manner. If people don't want to read my analysis, they don't have to.
CCL, comments are open on the blog page I linked to. If you see factual errors, please comment or email me and offer your corrections, along with documentation or references I can read; I am happy to even read articles or posts on the ReGAIN site. If I have made a factual error in laying out the history, I will correct it. Just saying I have been "duped" doesn't help people who want an accurate account of the events.
I would just like to add that every last one of these accusers had companions who are still alive and would have been called to testify under oath about the charges (that other LCs helped MM obtain drugs, or facilitated other nastiness, etc.)
While they might not have been able to confirm that something didn't happen, they would be able to provide valuable details as to time, date, place, and other circumstantial evidence that could prove some accusations either false or highly unlikely.
Apart from these men, there are also hundreds of fomrer Legionary religious, dozens of whom are Irish and American who disagree with the 2 dozen or so English speaking former Legionaries who frequent ReGain and contribute to the ongoing buzz of accusations.
They too left the Legion but do not share the minority's negative opinions about the Legion or Fr. Maciel.
So if eye witness accounts and personal experiences are the gold standard for knowing the truth, the full picture of what the Legion is and what Fr Maciel was like cannot be known until someone sits down and hears ALL the accounts.
The majority who are in favor vs. the minority who are not.
John,
The "majority" is a manufactured one. Many are still brainwashed and think the LC was genuine religious life. Others realize things were wrong but are still haunted by the self-doubt created by the Legion's profession of "being a work of God" - who would dare to criticize THAT! Or believe the false equation criticizing LC=harming Church. Or the false idea of charity. Some even think they are STILL bound by the private vow of never criticizing.
Most want to forget it since it seems an unresolvable question and their current life situation demands focusing on other things... and lets them numb the pain.
Finally, many know the LC has its own bag of 'dirty tricks' for handling critics -- such as the REGAIN lawsuit, a direct attempt to punish and shut-them up, and collect names.
Tell me how many religious groups (other than LC and Opus Dei) have serious charges against their founder, (which the Pope believes) and are SUING critics?
John, you appear gullible and naive.
Sorry, I was thinking about something else when I posted this. Opus Dei should not have been included in the last sentence of the above post.
No, no go ahead and include Opus Dei. There were serious charges against their founder,leveled by many former Opus members. There was/is a website devoted to "exposing" Opus Dei as an evil group of men... and yet it's a fact that Msgr. Escriva got Canonized and Opus Dei continues to exist as an approved Personal Prelature in the Church.
There continue to exist a dozen other historical parallels in Church history of founders being charged with horrible crimes only to eventually be cleared of them.
How to know whether the LC is different? It seems it will boil down to personal testimony, hence the importance of sheer numbers.
After all, a bad tree can't produce good fruit. If there are far more positive than negative witnesses, and the fruit of the LC/RC is far more positive than negative....
Eye witness testimony and "personal experience" are considered the gold standard for online debate, and there are far more individuals with positive things to say about Fr MM and the LC than negative. This has been apparent in their reunions at YFEs and informally among themselves. Among those who are not in RC, and who don't work for the LC either...
One interesting thing too is that these positive former members tended to have been members far longer, and with more wide spread experience than their online detractors who claim "inside" knowledge as though they were specially suited to draw global conclusions when in reality all of them had brothers and colleagues with as much if not more personal experience...who are pro-LC.
These former Legionaries aren't buying into the wild claims, exaggerations, and out right whoppers told by the small minority of their brothers who obsessively tour the Catholic blog world spreading dirt.
John, "sheer numbers" don't determine that a minority is lying. Appearances of visible fruit, like handsome Aryan Nazis in uniform, don't reveal the inner core. But from your implication that I or posters at REGAIN are making "wild claims, exaggerations, and out right whoppers" I can see you have a closed mind combined with an absolute insistence on having the last word. Sounds just like J.S.
To those who come here seeking information, I suggest you visit:
http://www.regainnetwork.org
http://www.life-after-rc.com
http://www.exlegionaries.com
http://www.rickross.com/groups/loc.html
and read the testimonies as well as the rules and norms. Compare them with other cult groups and make up your own mind. Clearly John already has. The Legion is suing REGAIN to hide the information from you. Get it while you can!
Devin,
I'm glad you admit you aren't being objective. I wanted to learn the truth, so I didn't dismiss Messrs. Renner and Berry just because they are against the Legion, even though their conclusions are, as I said, rather left-wing. If you keep an open mind about the possibility that the "more than 20, less than 100 men" who talked to Msgr Scicluna are telling the truth, and that Pope Benedict XVI was correct in agreeing that Maciel should be "grounded for life" for (most likely) sexually abusing boys as young as 10, it makes sense that Saint Rafael and the Jesuits would kick him out of the seminary, and that several other seminaries would refuse him admittance.
John, I know quite a few people who have had horrible experiences with the Legion; most of them are afraid to come out, for fear of retribution (like, a LAWSUIT). I know several others who have opposed the Legion, only to have false innuendo spread about them, including at least two priests in my diocese that I know about who were then removed from their positions. If you are asked to practice deceit ("discretion") for the sake of the Kingdom, it's the wrong Kingdom. You can't just cherry-pick the fruits you want to look at (sorry about the pun); ReGAIN is part of the Legion's fruit, as are all the broken, disgruntled ex-Catholic/ex-Christian exlegionaries.
xLC, I suspect members of Opus Dei will eventually wish that Josemaria Escriva had gone through the more rigorous canonization process that is now back in place; I fear he and the others canonized during JPII's papcy will get a Roger Maris-like asterisk by their names. Just a guess; we'll see.
Has it ever occured to you that it might not be a question of one side lying as much as one side simply not understanding the data? I.e. getting it wrong? Misinterpretation of facts and then rushing to judgment happens alot. It's what got us into Iraq (not Bush "lying").
Innocent men go to jail after being tried by a jury of their peers all the time because people misinterpret facts and rush to judgment (12 angry men comes to mind).
So why not be "open minded" enough to consider that alot of these on-line sites' accusations are mountains made of mole hills? Do you consider yourselves to be infallible?
I'm NOT arguing that there's zero problems among the LC or RC. They are composed of people and people can and do sin, make mistakes, hurt people. So considering that there are thousands of them, surely we'll find a few examples of bad people. It is almost a statistical certainty.
But a few bad examples, while regretable don't make everyone else bad.
Besides, the Vatican - in the same communique that asked Fr Maciel to retire, went on to praise the Legion and Regnum Christi for their service and the Church continues to approve their existence. So that stands for something.
And sheer numbers also stand for something - There are literally hundreds (over 500 at last count) former Legionary seminarians. Of all these names, only 2-3 dozen are "anti-" LC. If you want to go ahead and accuse all these men of being brain washed because they don't agree with you, be my guest, but don't be surprised if they consider you likewise brainwashed and close-minded.
The Legion is welcome in Rome and dozens of other major Archdioceses around the world. Their universities, schools, missions, apostolic works can speak for themselves in good fruit for souls.
And while there will always be RC people who embarrass themselves and the organization with imperfection or sin, you still can't claim the RC is evil or twisted or bad in light of the incredible number of good deeds that continue to be done by them for the local and universal church.
You obviously claim their intentions are bad, sidestepping the question of fruits, but those good fruits are there....and most people will see them and judge for themselves based on personal experience....and again, numbers will determine who is more correct in judgment vs. who's not.
How many of these negative experiences suffered by former members were committed by individuals who THEMSELVES are now "former members"? That's never asked or answered. I think lots.
Also if perfection in all dealings is the standard then who and what group could be deemed "good"? Every Parish and diocese in the country, EVERY religious order and seminary has "former members" who left in anger over perceived or real mistreatment. Stuff happens. It's not good, but it doesn't mean the whole is nothing but the sum of its worst part.
It's a fact that 10-15% of any given population of people will suffer from some type of mental illness from depression onward... and it's also a given that there will always be the capital sins of pride, anger, laziness etc. in the mix in ANY group under the sun. The LC included.
So trying to go from a handful of negative experiences - regretable all - to a sweeping condemnation of an organization with thousands of members spread across the globe, while denying the equally valid experiences of MORE people who had good experiences strikes me as prejudicial.
You can't keep saying "the Pope believes Fr MM guilty and the LC too" when in fact that's NOT what the Vatican communique means and specifically for the LC actually opposite to what it says. If therefore the Vatican, post-preliminary investigation (where only the negative testimonies were gathered with no "defense team" of witnesses called in for rebuttal), praised the good work of the LC/RC irrespective of the founder, I don't think I'm the one being stubborn here.
The LC/RC is not perfect. Neither is ReGain. People can in fact be sincerely mistaken about things without "lying". But personal testimony is valid and hence majorities will always, apples to apples, be more noteworthy than minorities when it comes to questions like these.
xLC,
If you are going to accuse someone of having a closed mind you better be able to demonstrate that yours is open. On this you have failed in spades.
And John, it is simply not true that bad trees cannot produce good fruit. With God, such things happen all the time. Even if all the accusations against Maciel and the LC are true (I have no earthly idea), the LC can still be and become an important instrument of God.
"Has it ever occured to you that it might not be a question of one side lying as much as one side simply not understanding the data? I.e. getting it wrong? Misinterpretation of facts and then rushing to judgment happens alot. It's what got us into Iraq (not Bush "lying")."
John, following your line of reasoning, we, the people who have experienced the good and the evil first hand, believe that you are the one who is drawing conclusions that God did not intend to be drawn. We can see why you feel so positive because we have been in your shoes but our experience includes much more. You cannot relate to us because you have not yet experienced as much as we have. We believe that YOU are rushing to judgments and, not only that, but we KNOW that your emotions were intentionally manipulated by MM and the integrated LC to do so.
From a another former member:
"I wanted to comment on the conclusions that I drew from the "signs" of God's favor(apparent good fruit) that seemed to be present in RC. If God seemed to be blessing something that we did in RC, for example, a team resolution, a Pure Fashion Show, the fruits of a Familia study, a K4J camp, etc..., I automatically assumed that it was a "sign" that he was totally in favor of RC/LC/MM. This assumption was definitely encouraged by the LC. We were constantly led to believe that all of the good fruit were signs of God's favor for the Legion. I see now that God was blessing our efforts in spite of the mixed agendas of RC/LC/MM not because of them. He was meeting us in our efforts to serve Him and trying to draw us closer to Him and His ways and not necessarily RC. Similar to the first reading from last week when we read about David defeating Goliath. At first it seemed to King Saul that God was blessing his kingship when, in fact, he was preparing for David to become king. Saul misread the "signs." Another example is the way that God seems to bless other Christian denominations in their efforts to serve him. They may assume because of those "signs"(the good fruit) that God is totally in favor of the whole organization and that they corner the market on salvation.
I think God will bless anything that we do that is good, true and beautiful but we have to be careful not to jump to the wrong conclusions when he does."
Noah tried to warn others in his day and we all know how successful he was. Thank God he did not give up. God's prophets have rarely been well received. I guarantee there was similar confusion among the faithful at the time of the Arian heresy or any other heresy for that matter. It is only clear from hindsight. We do not have illusions about being able to convince everyone of the truth but if we can save one soul from the trauma that we experienced then it is worth it. If the only thing we accomplish by posting on these blogs is a greater awareness of the hidden agenda and methods of the LC than so be it. Forewarned is forearmed.
Brilliant, Heather. All the same, folks, please pray for the victims. All the flurry to defend what appears orthodox forgets the young ones in the cross-hairs. Scandalised children and broken marriages aren't much of a legacy, despite all the glossy images to the contrary.
I trust the Church's judgment in approving Marian apparitions, religious congregations, saints, and in all matters of faith and morals.
For Opus Dei, the Church declared Josemaria Escriva to be a saint, in spite of his accusers and detractors, many of whom still stand by their charges. I believe the Church in this matter; they made the decision after years of investigation and with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
What about the Legion and Regnum Christi? What does the Church say about them?
From the chronology I compiled, the timeline is as follows:
1948: The Holy See grants the Legion canonical approval with the Nihil Obstat and subsequently Bishop Alfonso Espino y Silva grants canonical establishment to the Legion.
1965: The Holy See grants the Decree of Praise, Decretum Laudis, to the Congregation of the Legionaries of Christ, changing the status of the Legion from being an institution of diocesan right to pontifical right.
1983: Pope John Paul II approves the Legion’s Constitutions.
2004: The Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life grants final approval to the Regnum Christi Movement Statutes.
So, over the course of more than 50 years the Church deliberated and gave stronger and stronger approval to the establishment of the Legion of Christ and of Regnum Christi.
In this matter, also, I believe the Church that says these are good institutions rather than those who have had bad experiences and accuse them of being cults.
The Church is our Mother and Christ established her to bless us, protect us, and give us sure guidance into all truth; what she says in matters of faith and morals is trustworthy.
Yes, Devin, the Holy Mother Church will have the final say. But what you don't know is that she is not quick to judge. She is very patient and with heresies she waits until they are full grown(harvest time) before she cuts them off. In the beginning stages it is hard to distinguish the weeds from the wheat. She does not typically attempt to uproot them in the beginning because in doing so she may uproot the wheat along with the weeds (schism?). She "tests all things; holds fast to what is good" (1 Thess. 5:21)and this takes time. The CDF is now aware that there are more than one set of constitutions and that the set that was approved by the Church is not authentic. What the Church had approved is now being reinvestigated based on MANY new testimonies. The Church is now aware that she has been "duped." The real "fruits" of the LC are ripe and we are close to harvest time. The "sensus fidae" is growing about the real agenda of the LC. So, I like you, have complete trust in Holy Mother Church and I realize that my experience, along with so many others, will help to "bring into light that which is hidden in darkness" and will help to " disclose the purposes of hearts."
Also, Devin, it is a known fact that Fr. Maciel set out to destroy Opus Dei because they were "fishing out of the same pond" and because he had lifted so much of the OD spirituality to use for Regnum Christi. It is also a known fact that part of the plan to sabatoge OD was to send his "troops" into their camp as members and detractors to wreak havok from within and without. Part of that plan was to place many obstacles(letters. complaints, accusations, etc...) in the way of St. Jose Maria Escriva's canonization so that when Fr. Macial was up for canonization the inevitable adversity would have less of an impact. Like we have said before, be very careful whose kingdom you are defending. All that glitters is not gold and real humility, something that is not present in the LC/RC is the listmus test. Read the Doctors of the Church and you will start to see how far from the mark LC/MM/RC really is.
When will the REgain site be up and running again? I am a survivor of the Legions and love to read their site.
Commenting by HaloScan
